Category Archives: HS

Discussion Plan: Making and Creating – ps,hs

* Discussion Plan: Making and Creating, ps,hs

A. Consider what it takes to ‘make’ something in each of these  cases

  1. Can you turn a piece of fabric into a dress using a dressmaking pattern? If so, what form of activity does ‘making a dress’ involve? (what do you do to the fabric so that it is now a dress?)
  2. Can you make (or produce) a cake from flour, sugar, water and eggs? If so, what is involved in ‘making’ the ingredients into a cake?
  3. Can you make a face out of a lump of clay? If so, what is involved in ‘making’ the face?
  4. Can you produce a new song out of exiting sound clips? If so, what is involved in ‘making’ the new song?
  5. Can you make a work of art out of rubbish? If so, what is involved in ‘making’ it?
  6. Can you make/produce a new object that no-one has thought of before?  If so, what would this involve?
  7. Can you make up a story that no-one has imagined before? If so, what does this involve?
  8. Can you make a solution to a problem before anyone has even imagined the problem?  If so, how?

 For teachers: Here are some of the options for what ‘making’ might involve in the above discussion plan – but don’t limit your students to these:

Joining pieces together, mixing things together, uncovering something hidden within, moulding, reorganizing, transforming, reconceiving, inventing, intuiting.

 

B. Could any of these acts be acts of creating rather than of making?  If so, what would be the difference between them? (ie, between making a dress and creating a dress, making a cake, creating a cake, etc)?

 

Leading Idea: Moral responsibility – people & land -HS

Leading Idea: Moral Responsibility:  toward people, and toward the land.  

Burying the Dead

In this parshah the explanation for why we should not leave a dead body hung on a pole or tree overnight might take us by surprise. Two reasons are given. The one we might expect is that the human body itself places a moral demand on us, requiring we bury it in a timely manner so that it is not defiled (leaving a human body hanging is an affront to God, as we are ‘formed in God’s image’).  Yet we are also given a second reason, one less expected. We are told “you shall not defile (make unclean, טמאה) your land, which the Lord, your God, is giving you as an inheritance.”  that is, it is for the sake of the land that we are required to remove the body and bury it.* This suggests that we have a moral responsibility toward maintaining the environment (keeping it clean), and not just a moral duty toward the human body.

Do we have a moral responsibility to look after the environment out of a responsibility toward the other people with whom we share the environment (so they can play safely and in an aesthetic space), or do we do it out of a moral responsibility toward the environment itself (not to defile the land?). In our own contexts, what does ‘defiling the land’ mean? Are there ways our own actions or inaction leads to the land being made ‘unclean’? (open cut mining?  Littering? Destroying rainforestד? polluting rivers?). Are there physical actions in the environment we feel morally responsible to take for the sake of other human beings? Are there physical actions in the environment we feel morally responsible to take for the sake of the environment itself?

Another line of interpretation is found in Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch’s commentary that interprets ‘land’ as the ‘human ground’. What does ‘human ground mean? One way to read this is to see the human ground as the physical and social space in which humans act out their lives.. It is the inhabited ground, in which our moral sensibility and free-will find expression. For example, the choices we make in the way we conduct ourselves in the shopping mall, the way we treat animals, the way we conduct ourselves socially) Here Hirsch is not just talking about any expression of our free-will, but free-will is given to us to given full expression to our moral purpose as human beings.It is within this constructed space of the ‘activities of persons’ that we (created in God’s image) have the responsibility to express our moral purpose. For Hirsch this enables us to give full expression to our worth as human beings. It is for the sake of this ‘human ground’ that we have a moral responsibility to bury the dead who have lost this capacity (as, in death, the body of human beings becomes merely a body – it is no longer expressive of our free-will. In death, the body is governed instead by the un-free-will necessity of decomposition). This recognition of our responsibility toward burying the dead together with our responsiblity toward preserving the quality of ‘the inhabited space of society’ brings both these dimensions of responsibility (toward people and toward the environment) together. The last paragraph raises interesting ideas about the human response to death – what makes a person’s death challenging and the ways in which it might disturb us.

 

* If the body is left hanging animals may come and pull it apart and spread parts of the body on the land – since in Tanach, those things that come in touch with a dead body become unclean, unfit for use, the physical earth would now become unclean, unable to fulfill its purpose. The point here is that is our responsibility to attend to the body so that this does not happen.

Discussion Plan: Establishing new civic norms – ms-hs

Discussion:  Establishing new civic norms.

Do you think the following civic, or societal, norms were in place 30 years ago? If not, how do you think they came about? Who put them in place? In what ways are they moral or cultural norms? If they are moral norms, what values do they express?

  • Facebook etiquette
  • Expecting there to be a security check at the entrance to schools
  • Sharing the bill when going out on a date
  • Swapping clothes with a friend
  • Lighting candles at the sight of a tragedy
  • Considering it wrong to hit children
  • Having recycling bins in public areas
  • Having service learning programs in place in schools
  • Judging work in terms of productivity (rather than satisfaction or gainful employment)

Discussion Plan: Norms & rules in our institution-ms-hs

Discussion: Norms and rules in our own institution

What norms, rules, habits and rituals do you see around you in your school or synagogue – to what extent do you think they necessary for the school/synagogue to function? In what ways do they convey its values?  Are there any that you think go against the school or synagogue’s stated values? 

Discussion Plan: Knowing how to act – hs

Discussion Plan:  Knowing how to act

Are there societal norms and/or rules that govern how we act in the following situations – if so, how do we come to know about them? Is it anyone’s responsibility to make sure you know about them? How do we learn how to follow them? In each case, if there is a norm or rule – do you always follow it? Is there somewhere we can find the procedures to follow written out? Are they in plain language? Are they in clear view?

  • How to behave in class
  • What to do at a red traffic light
  • Who has right-of-way at an intersection where there are no road signs.
  • How to properly wait your turn at the post office
  • How to cross a road safely
  • How to behave when you visit a friend in their home
  • What counts as suitable clothing to wear to school
  • Your rights as a citizen
  • Who has priority seating on a bus
  • How to behave at a funeral
  • What counts as a ‘suitable’ present for a birthday.
  • How to make up with a friend after a fight
  • How much tzeddakah to give
  • Whether you can wear jewelry to school

Tzara’at as a spiritual disease- ms-hs

Commentary

By Rabbi Jonathan Cohen  (Rabbi of Michkan Torah, Greenbelt, MD)                      
Mishkan Torah is a member of both the Reconstructionist and Conservative movements 
adapted from: http://www.mishkantorah.org/rabbi-jonathan-cohen/tazria-metzora

The sages taught that tzara’at was not a bodily disease, but a physical manifestation of a spiritual disease. They believed that it was a punishment for saying bad or untrue things about others. They said that the Hebrew word Metzora is a contraction of the two words motzi and  rah which means “one who spreads slander.” The “treatment” or punishment for the person afflicted with tzara’at  was to be placed in isolation away from the community for a period of time. During this time he or she had time to reflect on the damage done by their words.

Once the condition had been cured, the metzorah then offered a sacrifice including two birds: one to slaughter and one to set free.

Q:  Why do you think one bird was slaughtered and one set free?

Lashon hara – Kamza & Bar Kamza – ms-hs

 

 The Story of Kamza and Bar Kamza

Yom Kippur 5772   October 7/8, 2011

Rabbi Ronne Friedman,  Temple Israel, Boston

One of the most monumental catastrophes of Jewish history was the destruction of the Second Temple by the Romans in the latter half of the first Christian century.  Just as the prophets of ancient Israel had attempted to interpret the reasons for the destruction of the first Temple 650 years earlier, the rabbis of the Talmud struggled to provide a theological rationale for the second devastation, one that would preserve group identity in an era of loss and exile.

A Talmudic story that purports to explain the reason that the Temple was destroyed tells us of a certain unidentified man who “had a friend named Kamza and an enemy by the name of Bar Kamza.  This man threw a party and said to his servant, go and bring Kamza back to the party.  The servant, however, went and brought Bar Kamza. When the host found Bar Kamza there at his party, he said, “Look, you gossip about me; what are you doing here? Get out.” Bar Kamza replied: “Since I am here, let me stay, and I will pay you for whatever I eat and drink.” The host said, “I won’t.”  Bar Kamza then said, “Let me give you half the cost of the party.” “No,” said the host. “Then let me pay for the whole party.” The host still refused, and he took Bar Kamza by the arm and put him out.

Bar Kamza said to himself, “Since the Rabbis were sitting there and did not stop him, this shows that they agreed with him. I will go and inform against them, to the Government. He went and said to the Emperor of Rome, the Jews are rebelling against you….”  As a result of this, the Temple was destroyed.

—————————–

1  Note from this incident, the Talmud concludes, how serious a thing it is to put a person to shame, for God  took up the cause of Bar Kamza, and as a result God destroyed His own House and burnt His own Temple (and we ourselves have been exiled from the land.)

2   The rabbis seize upon this most painful historical event in their experience, the destruction of the Temple, and identify it as a divine consequence of the humiliation of an enemy.